It was hood.

Pick of the forwards was Bowden, he looked a real handful, Atoni did big minutes, nothing spectacular, Uele just needs minutes but looks a big lad. Lawford had some nice touches, but Jowitt was head and shoulders above, showed a clean pair to dust Miller to score and his overall attack was class. Although he didn’t really get a lot of ball I thought Pratt looked really dangerous with ball in hand and opened them up a good few times, I was impressed with his defence also. Overall I’m fairly happy, second half when the changes rang Ackers just had a field day for 10 mins where as in the 1st half he was fairly quiet.

I will probably watch a re run once I get home as I missed the last three Leeds scores.

I didn't get that at all.
He was very dangerous in first half. Moved him out of position in second.

Despite the second half collapse, plenty to take from it. Lawford looked class and some very good defensive reads by Pratt. The lack of cover at full back after Max went off, looked obvious to see

First thing Powell needs to look at is the new rules, we gave away at least 5 penalties for not putting the foot on the ball.
Other than that, loads of positive signs for me in that game. We also looked fitter and sharper than last season

It’s very early days but I didn’t think Uale looked fit enough. I thought Boothroyd looked a handful and think he’ll will go well in the Championship…..

Bizarrely Leeds played the ball perfectly for 80 mins, the ref caned us.

It was Hood, about the only thing he did .but seems to get away with it week in week out As soon as Jowitt went of we struggled in attack

Yes being in the championship has some advantages. I dont think we will see much of Grant or Kendell next season

Hardly fair to have a go at Hood when he's covering halfback.
He put some decent passes in but it was bound to focus around Lawford.

https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/rugb ... s-28349833 Mathew Shaw has give us a good write up.

https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/rugb ... s-28349833 Mathew Shaw has give us a good write up.

What players were swapped at half time and what position did they play?

I counted 3, 2 of them from Franco who had a bit of a stinker to be fair.

All in all though it was an interesting exercise.

Thought as a team we showed our hand in how we hope to play next year. So much push around the ball which was great to see and we will clearly be playing at the line and asking our forwards to promote the ball and play out of the back in our attacking shape.

Loads of positives from me however just focusing on the centres though Pratt and Thornley were very good.

Pratt showed his threat and ability and Thornley whilst he lacks the agility of a top flight centre showed how good he is going to be in the Championship. Big body, strong cary and reads a game very well.

Think our wingers are going to have a very enjoyable year in 2024.

Memories of Alex Walker when Franco was given the job of running the ball out from behind our line. Lesson learned, hopefully.

Oddly I found that more satisfying than when we won the game last year… stand outs for me were … Lawford… looked good until he was the only distributor left on the pitch… Cozza looked smart and aggressive… Doyle looks a good player… Jowitt looks a class apart.. decent pace from Walmsley… strong defence from Thornley… great promise from Pratt

You don’t put players fitness at risk in a trial game and in 2nd half there were too many players playing in positions they don’t train for, and were undone by some clever dummy half play…

The game has not dampened or increased my optimism…

I was always optimistic but I am more so now after seeing the first half.
We looked well drilled which will be important for us this year.
The defense will be able to squeeze teams out when they come all enthusiastic to beat the big boys. I was a little concerned we might just try and out point teams but the signs are good.

Some great slick passing in the first half and some poor defensive reads in the second probably sums it up for me , plenty to be positive about and plenty still to do , but a great run out to blow some cobwebs off and see how our charges faired under duress . Nothing to get worried about for me at this stage , still some quality sat watching from the sidelines . Will have done the players and coaches the power of good going forwards

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MQADlR1oz_M

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MQADlR1oz_M

Need more than passes from a 6, I look at it this way if he is the answer,when Gale gets injured we are in the brown stuff .Friendly or not was a worry when Max went of the attack was none existent in the second half .Got a lot of respect for you , so guess we will have to disagree

But he isn't the answer.
It was a late change after Lino, Gale and Kay all unavailable.
He was simply there to tackle and pass the ball on so others could show their skills.

We are not disagreeing. Hood should not be playing 7.

I didn't go to Headingly, but I did got to Dewsbury Rams v Batley and watched the Chris Kendal show where he penalised Dewsbury 18 times for incorrect play of the ball and Batley not once. Looks like we will have an early season of ridiculous penalty counts due to inconsistent refereeing of the rules.
Why we can't remove some of the additional ludicrous rules that have been added to the game in the las 5-7 years and go back to being a simple game that everyone can understand (including the referees) I don't know.

The play the ball with your foot is obviously not new and is possibly one part of the game since inception. The problem is to attempt to go for speed the use of the foot was slowly ignored. I have no problem it is how the game was meant to be played, the ones we conceded were penalties. It may be a situation where some teams are better drilled thereby producing lopsided penalty counts in the early games.
I also like the enforcement of the rule applicable to the position of the markers at the play the ball. The two are old rules but definitely intrinsically part of what RL is.

I can tell you what Mr Kendal told the players was not in relation to the "actual" rules being applied, but his interpretation of the "inference of tapping the ball back" and he only applied this to one team, whereas both teams were playing it similarly. Either tap the ball back with foot or penalty, no interpretation or "inference" required

Kendal is a self important dick, it's no surprise controversy follows him. Awful ref whether a neutral or a fan of one of the teams involved.